Subject: Re: next steps related to bridging

From: "Hattig, Myron" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 17:21:38 -0800

My opinion is the IP/1394 should follow the necessary
steps to support GASP and move the NPM/NETWORK_CHANNELs
functionality to p1394.a to provide a general purpose 1394
broadcast mechanism.

-myron

---

From: Kaz Honda <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 18:22:10 +0900

> functionality to p1394.a to provide a general purpose 1394

I strongly disagree. This WG was organized in summer 1997 and since
then we've made some efforts to standardize how to send IP datagram
over 1394. NPM/NETWORK_CHANNELs are part of our efforts and are
invented for the purpose of IP1394. If other standardizing bodies want
to generalize them, they can do whatever they want. But we should not
be affected by this.

If they want to generalize our outcome, all they have to do is make
reference to our specs. Period.

We've already done the interoperability test to verify the
NPM/NETWORK_CHANNELs that we defined works well. I don't see any
reason that p1394.a people need any modification. Nevertheless, why do
we have to pass our control to p1394.a?  Why do we have to wait until
p1394.a generalizes our outcome?

Anyway, I don't want to delay standardizing IP/1394 spec any longer.

--
Kaz Honda <[email-masked]>
R&D Dept., ITC                   Fone: +81-3-5448-8401
Sony Corporation                 Phax: +81-3-5448-8977